Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that With the disclosure of one's own being as being-for-and-with-others, the being of other individuals becomes simultaneously disclosed as possessing that same feature

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Husserl's Fifth Cartesian Meditation shows that other minds are constituted through analogical apperception, not co-disclosed in one's own self-understanding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The 'pairing' association that grounds intersubjectivity requires a distinct inferential step beyond self-disclosure, making simultaneous co-disclosure implausible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sartre argues in Being and Nothingness that the Other is fundamentally encountered as a threat to one's freedom, not as a symmetrical co-relational being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the Other's gaze constitutes me as an object, the structure of intersubjectivity is asymmetric and conflictual, not the mutual relational disclosure the claim assumes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.One's own being is disclosed as being-for-and-with-others
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.An individual does not need to find a separate path to another individual
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The disclosure of one's own relational being carries with it the disclosure of others as equally relational beings
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42